About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
to taking the same position as george w. bush. funny thi. lou: the progress toward a more constrained iran has ended in this issue in turninghe other direction. ayollah saying today that they will annihilate the jewish cities. if it comes under attack. >> a country security it can be measured in miles and minutes. while they have a wonderful defense and missile defense system, they have quite a few major missiles. not the ones from southern lebanon, but big warheads, conventional warheads. and only i you need to get through to land to cause tremendous casualties. when people p privately or publicly come and say why aren't they acting. the leader of the country of israel has stepped talk about the repercussions, and that includes large civilian casualties. one should only strike as a measure of last resort and not because other extnal-internal forces are asking him to. lou: and the more bellicose iran becomes, the algorithm for a pre-emptive strike, the nuclear plants ourself evidence. the algorithms are pre-emptive strikes as they become more bellicose and threatening. what is him if you w
of the bush to ministration, destroy the north korean nuclear reactor. i think that what we're seeing here is the continuing division over the proximity to a what position capability. add the netanyahu made it pretty clear in the press conference today that the uranium enrichment side, which is of long pole in anybody stand in a nuclear-weapons program is the point that he is most worried about. lou: point-blank, do you really believe that israel will attack without the support and promised support, active support of the united states military? >> they would prefer. lou: and trying to understand what you're saying here. another would prefer it. i would even go so far as to say it is an existential preference, they cannot make that decision unilaterally without the military support of the united states guaranteed. >> i don't know what the decision is going to be. lou: nor do why, but i'm asking for your view. >> the prospect of a nuclear ron, i think it will preempt. they have done it twice before. >> what makes me so mad, we have seen is happening for two years. we knew there would get to
% of the records are in the system, and the nixon act passed in 2007 signedded by bush in january of 2008 gave states inacceptabilityives to -- incentives to put records in. there's more since that time, but states have more to do. i know when virginia tech happened, my home state of indiana had zero records, and now we're up to -- we got more in the system now, but there's a long way to go. at virginia state, there were just four records in new york state. there's a lot of work to be done and needs to be a top priority, unless you do background checks on every sale, it doesn't make a difference. lou: yet, the priority, eric, has been on assault weapons ban that institutes such a small fraction of the overall problem here. your thoughts on that of the gun owners association? >> well, you're right. it would cover just minorities of the murders. as you noted before, lou, the more people die at the hands of clubs, hammers, and things like that than these so-called assault weapons, which, really, what they are after is banning common self-defense firearms. we're thankful this last saturday there w
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)